F-15e Update?

[Hiob]

Just now, AMBUSH said:

Usually there are at least three: Side A, Side B and the Reality/Truth Side. The Reality/Truth Side rarely matches either of the others completely but will tend to be closer to one than the other.

Whatever, the important part was - it is more than one.

People are jumping to conclusions and in reality they don‘t know anything. It‘s a dispute between contract parties and they should solve it behind closed doors. The court of public opinion isn’t well suited for those matters. 

Razbams vague statement was semi-professional in my opinion, and forced ED into a reply (that I found equally „semi“ tbh). But from here on it should stay between them until solved. Even if that hurts our (mine for sure) curiosity.

[TLTeo]

From RB devs. Whatever the two sides are it's clear one of them is completely off in this.

[Bluto74]

Again.  Without the contract details, we can't know who.  If that is true, legal means could get them their money, and they would not have to abandon customers.  This could hurt purchases from 3rd party devs in the long run.  I know I will think twice about giving money for a product that can be abandoned by a dev, and left holding my in my hand.  But there were better ways to handle this besides upheaval.  We will see how this plays out.

 

[Jarhead0331]

This sounds like personality and ego driving this fight in my personal opinion. ED most certainly has contracts with these TPDs that also most certainly contain payment provisions and dispute resolution provisions. I bet they even contain non-disparagement and confidentiality provisions. Thus, the whole public airing of this grievance is just rubbing me the wrong way, and to then state you're simply "done" developing for DCS in response to Nick's initial public response...Pretty unprofessional I think. 

[AndyJWest]

Regardless of who is in the right or wrong here, this is clearly going to put a severe dent in the confidence of anyone contemplating making further purchases. 

[Jarhead0331]

7 minutes ago, AndyJWest said:

Regardless of who is in the right or wrong here, this is clearly going to put a severe dent in the confidence of anyone contemplating making further purchases. 

Agreed. The only real losers will be the dedicated fans...ie. us.

[wussa]

It's a shame that the users are being used as leverage here. If there are contract problems, they should be solved professionally and not made such a move.

Well, I won't be buying anything from RB's EA anymore. In terms of quality it was always a gamble and now something like this.

[LordOrion]

Well, this is bad.

Really bad.

[dfpoor]

1 hour ago, LordOrion said:

 

Well, this is bad.

Really bad.

Really shocking.  I came here because the 15E is a total beast.  Jdams don't work for me, they work for everyone else, so someone suggested I reinstall the module.  I thought I might wait for the next update.  I went back to the Viper.  Woefully underpowered.  The 15E is a beast.  Even in an unfinished state, it is head and shoulders above all the other jets.

Perhaps the dispute concerns the South Atlantic map which appears to be a commercial failure.  Pure speculation, I know.  Maybe ED will pay them to finish the SE.  And then Razbam will leave DCS.  Bad news for everyone.

The Harrier is a fine product.  And I like the Mirage. Razbam hit a homerun here, the Strike Eagle is a blast to fly.

Only one company makes hifi combat jetsims.  I'm sure the margins are razor thin.  This industry is probably more hobby than profit.  The irony is some DCS users make millions on Youtube, while the developers struggle to break even.  If Razbam leaves, they will be missed very much.

[Cypher1o1]

25 minutes ago, dfpoor said:

Only one company makes hifi combat jetsims.  I'm sure the margins are razor thin.  This industry is probably more hobby than profit.  The irony is some DCS users make millions on Youtube, while the developers struggle to break even.  If Razbam leaves, they will be missed very much.

This is my concern as MSFS have stated repeatedly they will not allow weapons of any form on their sim. 

(Side note I'm not sure anyone is making millions on youtube from dcs content) 

I hope cooler heads prevail and this can get resolved. No matter whos fault it is if this is the real end between Razbam and DCS the real losers in this will be the player base.

Edited April 5, 2024 by Cypher1o1

[notproplayer3]

ED or RAZBAM should get their <profanity> together, I don't care who's fault it is, in the end I paid the price of an AAA game for this module and while I was a satisfied customer when I bought the plane, I'd consider myself ripped off if the updates ended here.

I can be empathetic towards the side that is in the right, but all that I see is both sides blaming the other while not taking any responsibility or explaing what is going on, all that in front of the customers, quite unprofessional...

 

P.S: ffs, the F15E is one of my favorite planes irl, it was a dream come true when it released in DCS and I was eagerly awaiting the CTU upgrades RAZBAM promised plus all the stuff still missing in that module.

Edited April 5, 2024 by notproplayer3

[exhausted]

5 hours ago, Jarhead0331 said:

This sounds like personality and ego driving this fight in my personal opinion. ED most certainly has contracts with these TPDs that also most certainly contain payment provisions and dispute resolution provisions. I bet they even contain non-disparagement and confidentiality provisions. Thus, the whole public airing of this grievance is just rubbing me the wrong way, and to then state you're simply "done" developing for DCS in response to Nick's initial public response...Pretty unprofessional I think. 

"Non-disparagement and confidentiality provisions" if in existence, would lead me to believe that the claim Razbam is making is more likely to be true. If a party breaches a contract, a promise in that contract has been broken, so if Razbam breached second by giving information that looks bad to ED, then maybe it's not the breach.

Edited April 5, 2024 by exhausted

[Wizard_03]

Depending on the outcome of this situation, the F-15E may be the last DCS module I ever purchase. 

 

Absolutely unbelievable, what a complete slap in the face to all the loyal supporters who really have no where else to turn for modern high fidelity study sims, many who have been here for more than a decade. My eyes are on both companies the EULA doesn't cover false advertising. The product page has a list of features that the module was supposed to ship with on release. So Either Deliver what I paid for or give me my money back. Period. Customers shouldn't be held hostage over disagreements whoever is right or wrong in this case or any case. 

 

Even with a best case outcome, this situation has seriously degraded my trust in both parties, and going forward I will be much more careful about supporting either side with my wallet. 

Edited April 5, 2024 by Wizard_03

[OldFlyer]

9 hours ago, SlipHavoc said:

IMO if you're going to post something like this, you should link to sources.

Edit: Such as this discord post.

 

It’s not up to me to do research for others.

[OldFlyer]

4 hours ago, AndyJWest said:

Regardless of who is in the right or wrong here, this is clearly going to put a severe dent in the confidence of anyone contemplating making further purchases. 

100%. I’ll definitely be holding off to see where all this settles before investing anymore money in modules, maps, etc.

It will also take some internal convincing to want to buy RAZBAM products in the future, to be honest. I get that they’re frustrated but is withholding work on products we’ve paid for the only lever they have to pull?

Might even check out that ‘other’ (basically free) sim.

[Jarhead0331]

45 minutes ago, exhausted said:

"Non-disparagement and confidentiality provisions" if in existence, would lead me to believe that the claim Razbam is making is more likely to be true. If a party breaches a contract, a promise in that contract has been broken, so if Razbam breached second by giving information that looks bad to ED, then may it's not the breach.

 

It wouldn’t be the first time, nor the last, that a party to a contract breached confidentiality or non-disparagement provisions. As a lawyer and commercial litigator, I see it all the time and it’s no indicator of who is in the legal right here with respect to the underlying dispute. Furthermore, and largely depending on the language of the contractual provisions, even if ED breached first in some way with respect to payment, it would most likely not permit Razbam to violate any other provision of the contract, nor serve as any meritorious defense to such a claim.

[exhausted]

8 minutes ago, Jarhead0331 said:

It wouldn’t be the first time, nor the last, that a party to a contract breached confidentiality or non-disparagement provisions. As a lawyer and commercial litigator, I see it all the time and it’s no indicator of who is in the legal right here with respect to the underlying dispute. Furthermore, and largely depending on the language of the contractual provisions, even if ED breached first in some way with respect to payment, it would most likely not permit Razbam to violate any other provision of the contract, nor serve as any meritorious defense to such a claim.

Could it mean both of them are in the wrong, and what's the remedy for a disparaging remark? I would assume you have to prove damages to recover or would have to invoke whatever mechanism is in the contract, if there is one, that would allow them to break the contract. Other than that, I would think they pretty much would need to work it out, in which case I couldn't fault one side for getting things moving. 

[SlipHavoc]

39 minutes ago, OldFlyer said:

It’s not up to me to do research for others.

I think it actually is.

[Ignition]

5 hours ago, wussa said:

It's a shame that the users are being used as leverage here. If there are contract problems, they should be solved professionally and not made such a move.

Well, I won't be buying anything from RB's EA anymore. In terms of quality it was always a gamble and now something like this.

We don't know if there weren't previous conversations.

I wont be buying anything DCS related until this is solved. I don't trust anything now.

[Ikaros]

Whatever is going on, I hope it can be resolved amicably and development can continue. 

I have every single Razbam module and the possibility of no more updates or development is giving me a lot concern.

I waited over a decade for the Strike Eagle, and the Mirage and AV8B have always been some of personal favorite aircraft. Not being able to fly them in such detail in a simulation would be a huge personal blow for me, on top of the money I've already spent.

I did not buy these modules under the assumption that bug fixing and development would cease at any point or that the modules might cease to exist from DCS either.

[Blooddawn1942]

I hope both companies get this stuff sorted out. The way they throw mud in the public at each other is extremely unprofessional. 

I own every Razbam module and I'm very concerned that especially the F-15E and SA map won't see a finalization anymore. 

As a customer I feel like being held as an hostage by Razbam and thats a slap right in the face after supporting them over the years especially while their first 2 modules needed many years to mature but nevertheless I always trusted them. This trust is annihilated. 

This dispute had never had to reach the public. The companies should work their dispute behind the curtain. Man. I have other businesses to care. That's so annoying. 

Edited April 5, 2024 by Blooddawn1942

[YoYo]

On 4/4/2024 at 3:57 AM, rwbishUP said:

Can we expect some upgrades for the, Mud Hen, whenever ED pushes out an update next?

Maybe change a topic to „Problem with updates and current situation”?

[Ignition]

1 hour ago, Blooddawn1942 said:

I hope both companies get this stuff sorted out. The way they throw mud in the public at each other is extremely unprofessional. 

I own every Razbam module and I'm very concerned that especially the F-15E and SA map won't see a finalization anymore. 

As a customer I feel like being held as an hostage by Razbam and thats a slap right in the face after supporting them over the years especially while their first 2 modules needed many years to mature but nevertheless I always trusted them. This trust is annihilated. 

This dispute had never had to reach the public. The companies should work their dispute behind the curtain. Man. I have other businesses to care. That's so annoying. 

 

Razbam needed to explain why there would not be any update for any of their modules. I don't see any problem with that.

[YoYo]

I won't blame anyone, neither ED nor Razbam, there are things we don't know about but in my opinion Razbam didn't break any rules if no payments were made. The contract includes not only obligations but also obligations for both side. If it is true that Razbam has not been receiving money from ED for a long time despite reminders, then there is something strange here. The truth probably lies somewhere in between, but at the same time, the ED's response should be adequate to alleviate the situation, not to add fuel to the fire. I rather see Razbam's actions as a cry of despair, when all other means, e-mails, contacts, etc. have failed and despite this, adequate support and a solution to the problem have not been obtained from the ED (the ED is giving the cards here, remember, not Razbam, so it is a kind of "worker's strike" as desperation effect). 

 

[stonewall197922]

When user buy module to DCS, it`s agreement between user and ED. So if Razbam put further support and development on hold (or completly stopped), ED should support and develop module by itself. Official statement from ED is required at current state. I also suggest to put on hold sales of the affected modeles.  It definitely have consequences  on  sales from other modules.